I see Dawkins' memetics as forming a self-consistent and powerful social/emotional framework when integrated with the ideas of Riane Eisler, Eric Berne, and Chris Hedges. While the nuances of a consistent intellectual framework don't exist, I think a concilience will form.
Because this coming together works best on an emotional level, I've built it into a ritual to support deconversion. For more details see the ritual in Memetics & Cultural Evolution, and Imagine No Religion.
Interesting that Dawkins is generally considered the person who made memetics famous. Memetics is like string theory, interesting and holding a great deal of explanatory power, but as yet unproven in experiment. I'm sure Dawkins is aware (and probably Dennett, too) that it would be very hard to create a solid experimental design to test whether a proposed meme actually exists. Until then, memes remain more in the area of philosophy than of science. If we are not careful in our talk of memes, we can end up dangerously close to metaphysics, especially of the Hegelian kind, talking of "historical forces" and so on. The title "War is a Force that Gives us Meaning" troubles me since it smacks of historicism of this kind. Perhaps the book itself does not make such a case, but the title does point in that direction.
War is a Force that Gives Us Meaning gives powerful first hand accounts of war from a veteran war correspondent. The conclusions Hedges draws about the psychology, politics, and history of war aren't metaphysical. It's not about "forces." That's just a metaphor in the title. He makes generalizations from his first hand observations mostly, though he draws on history. It isn't about memetics at all. I learned a lot about the real world vs government lies of omission from this book.
I stand informed.